200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 Key: Mid Mersey study area N UU Integrated WRZ Eden and Esk 550000 550000 CAMS Lower Mersey and Alt Derwent Croal and Irwell Crossens Water available / Dee no water available Derwent Water available / overabstracted Douglas (Derwent, Duddon, W.Cumbria) Leven & 500000 500000 Duddon Crake Duddon Eden and Esk Kent Lune Kent Leven and Crake Water available / no water available One WRMU is over licensed Lune (Lune) Mersey and Bollin Ribble Mostly over licensed. Two WRMUs are over abstracted due to PWS Roch, Irk and Medlock 450000 (Wyre) 450000 Wyre Ribble Shropshire Middle Severn Water available to over licensed (Northern Manchester) Tame, Goyt and Etherow Range between water available to no water available / over abstracted Weaver and Dane (Ribble, Douglas, Crossens) Water available / Wyre no water available Crossens (Northern Manchester) Douglas Croal and UU = United Utilities Irwell Roch, Irk and PWS = Public Water Supply Medlock Majority no water available / overabstracted 400000 Water available 400000 (Lower Mersey & Alt) Tame, Goyt Lower Mersey and Alt and Etherow 04.5 9 18 27 36 Mersey and Bollin Kilometers Scale: 1:1,100,000 Dee water available / H:\Projects\28467 Mid Mersey WCS\Drawings\GIS\mxd Majority no water available over licensed / over licensed (Mersey Bollin) Mid Mersey Outline Water Cycle Study Weaver and Dane Water available Figure 4.4 Dee 350000 350000 CAMS in the water resource zone November 2010 28467-W09 RYANS 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 Based upon the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright. AL100001776 Page 36 Doc Reg No. 28467 rr064i4 April 2011 4.2.4 Water Supply Infrastructure The extensive links between sources of supply and the centres of demand in the Integrated Zone means that developments in Warrington, Halton and St. Helens are more likely to be constrained by water supply infrastructure than by water resource availability. To support this Outline WCS United Utilities has examined the total number of expected development sites as set out in the SHLAA for all three Councils. United Utilities has assessed the impact on water supply of the existing distribution network and has categorised and defined sites as follows: • High resource availability. Infrastructure connectivity in the area is robust. There is no evidence of pressure problems within the existing customer base. Connection requests are likely to progress with minimal disruption and lead time. • Medium resource availability. The existing infrastructure may be inadequate for planned development. Modelling may be required to process requests for new connections. This would increase the lead time before the infrastructure is in place. It would also potentially incur costs to potential developers. • Low resource availability. There are known concerns with further developments in this geographical area. Modelling is definitely required to process new connection requests. It is highly likely that developers will be required to invest capital. Lead time before the infrastructure is in place may be significant. This should be factored into any planned developments in such areas. Table 4.4 summarises the locations where the infrastructure is constraining water supply. It is important to consider the following caveats when interpreting this assessment: • This evaluation is based upon a case-by-case basis for a single development. Multiple developments over time in a concentrated area will impact on the resource availability rating; • In any significant connection request, there is a need to evaluate via modelling the impact on the surrounding network to ensure that customer serviceability in regards to pressure and availability of water is not negatively impacted. The assessment focussed on housing development sites. For employment sites, water supply is normally planned based on volumes identified as being required by the developers. It is more difficult to proactively manage and plan for because industrial sites may use water for a wide range of uses for example, for domestic (kitchen, toilets) purposes, or for process use in manufacturing. Consequently, the relationship between employment land use and water demand is difficult to define and plan for. Page 37 Doc Reg No. 28467 rr064i4 April 2011 Table 4.4 Water Supply Constraints Council Constraint Comments Level Warrington The majority of sites are not constrained by supply infrastructure. There are minor supply network issues constraining development in Warrington town centre. These will be addressed through the Warrington Supply Improvements scheme. No action for Councils. High Warren service reservoir network periphery: developers would need to fund network enhancements (such as mains reinforcement) to ensure that development here would not result in low pressure for existing customers. New sites in North Warrington would be fed from a strategic main that has a history of bursts. Sections of this main may require duplication and no scheme is currently in place to address this. Omega and Chapelford sites would place significant additional demand on existing network. United Utilities has identified two potential solutions: 1) Construct two link mains to Winwick and Brown Edge service reservoirs, costing approximately £25m; 2) Reinforce the south side of Omega through network enhancements delivered as part of the Widnes Waterfront development, costing around £5m and requiring 12-18 months to complete. United Utilities will not progress either solution until a requisition is received. Site 1506 Peel Hall is located in an area where existing customers might experience low pressure if development were to proceed within network enhancements. Modelling is required to determine requirements. Arpley Meadows site is difficult to access in terms of water supply network due to the Manchester Ship Canal, the River Mersey and railways bordering the site. A dedicated main, funded by developers, is likely to be required, with a 3-4 year lead time and estimated cost >£5m. No sites are subject to prohibitive constraints Halton Development within the North Widnes area is not constrained by supply infrastructure. Sites located within Runcorn town centre are subject to minor constraints. Due to the number of sites (around 13 identified in SHLAA) and the presence a larger site (Runcorn Docks) in the area, United Utilities consider that further investigation would be required through network modelling to confirm whether network enhancements would be required. Development in the Widnes Waterfront could not be supported by the local network. A new main will be taken from an aqueduct at Dan’s Road. As development is progressed, connections to the local network will be shut off so that the development is fed directly off the Dan’s Road main. This project is underway currently. Runcorn Docks (site 288) The developer has identified the potential of up to 4000 properties on this site. The Halton Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2010 identifies a yield of 1,400 units in the period to 2026. United Utilities state that demand from development in the first 5 years could be met. However, subsequently network enhancements would be required. These could include a dedicated main to Runcorn service reservoir (2-3 years lead time) or a by-pass main (6 months lead time). Sites 266 Keckwick Lane, 853 Land Adjacent to Preston Brook Marina, 801 Delph Lane and 138 Castlefields are all identified as sites with potential connectivity issues due to the presence of transport infrastructure (sites bounded by motorways, canals and railways). This makes accessing the sites and connecting to the existing network difficult. Potential solutions exist for all sites, but would require further investigation. No sites are subject to prohibitive constraints Page 38 Doc Reg No. 28467 rr064i4 April 2011 Council Constraint Comments Level St. Helens Sites in the northern and north western areas of St. Helens are not constrained by supply infrastructure (i.e. in wards of Moss Bank, Windle, West Park, and Eccleston) The vast majority of sites in St. Helens have medium resource availability. Depending on the actual number of developments in a given area there may be some pressure issues that would require mains reinforcement (i.e. sites 56, 132, 135, 168, 310, 404, 411, 414, 495, 506, 507, 532, 595, 604). Moss Bank is generally unconstrained but there are localised areas where new development may require mains reinforcement to improve supply availability (low resource availability). Site 412 in Moss Bank is identified as not being close to the supply network. Similarly, parts of Rainford, and out towards Billinge are in the same situation. Elsewhere in parts of West Park (168, 285, 333) and Thatto Heath (41, 173, 269, 317, 501, 600) the pumped supply has already been upgraded but additional reinforcements could be needed to improve the situation. No sites are subject to prohibitive constraints Within the Mid Mersey area, no potential development sites have been identified as being unable to proceed due to major water supply constraints. Warrington is served by three service reservoirs: • Hillcliffe is located to the south of the town centre and serves south Warrington and the town centre; • High Warren is located to the South East of Warrington and serves the Lymm area; and • A reservoir at Winwick serves Warrington north of the town centre. The Warrington Supply Improvement scheme is currently being implemented by